IcePath icepath.io · Hockey Analytics
← New Search ↗ Social Card

Nick Simson Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1988-03-17 Country: USA
No commitment set

Set Commitment

NCAA Division I

NCAA D3 / D2

Career Trajectory
Dashed = raw PPG  ·  ■ Solid blue = age-adjusted NCAAe-PPG  ·  ■ Green = actual college PPG
Junior Seasons
Season Team League GP G A Pts PPG NCAAe-PPG Age-Adj D3e-PPG Age-Adj
2006-07 St. Louis Bandits NAHL 41 3 6 9 0.220 0.0815 0.0831 0.2324 0.2369
2007-08 Kenai River Brown Bears NAHL 54 14 21 35 0.648 0.2406 0.2334 0.6862 0.6657
2008-09 Kenai River Brown Bears NAHL 57 9 36 45 0.789 0.2931 0.2698 0.8359 0.7695
■ Blue = NCAAe (D1 anchor)   ■ Green = D3e (D3 anchor)   COVID-flagged seasons highlighted in yellow
College Seasons (Historical)
Season School Div Conference Year GP G A Pts PPG
2009-10 Fredonia D3 — FR 16 2 5 7 0.438
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.22
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.44
2009-10 · Fredonia
+100.2% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#16853
Forward overall
#726
Forward born in 1988
#1378
in NAHL

D1 Comparables

Ricky DeRosa
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.71 PPG
→ Penn State (0.38 D1 FR PPG)
0.24 Average
NCAAe PPG
Ali Thomas
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.34 PPG
→ Notre Dame (0.18 D1 FR PPG)
0.19 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Jordan Nelson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.59 PPG
→ Minnesota State (0.22 D1 FR PPG)
0.34 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Bradley Duwe
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.65 PPG
→ Alaska Anchorage (0.30 D1 FR PPG)
0.23 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Will Suter
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.47 PPG
→ Bentley (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.27 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Robert Clerc
SUNY Potsdam · 2017-18
0.625 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Arlen Marshall
Manhattanville · 2005-06
0.840 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Jack Johnson
Saint John's · 2018-19
0.957 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG

How to read this: NCAAe and D3e factors convert a player's junior PPG into expected NCAA scoring at the D1 or D3 level. Harder conferences → lower projected PPG for the same player. A strong junior player (e.g. USHL 0.90 PPG) will project much higher in NESCAC than Big Ten because the D3 scoring environment is lower-difficulty.

Strength factor: conferences above 1.0 are harder than average; below 1.0 are easier. The formula is: Base NCAAe PPG ÷ Conference Strength = Projected PPG.